Proof of Bernoulli's Inequality using Mathematical Induction

  Рет қаралды 58,099

The Math Sorcerer

The Math Sorcerer

9 жыл бұрын

Please Subscribe here, thank you!!! goo.gl/JQ8Nys
Proof of Bernoulli's Inequality using Mathematical Induction

Пікірлер: 36
@melynx1159
@melynx1159 Жыл бұрын
I'm so glad this channel exists. Despite my enormous passion for the subject, my maths skills mysteriously vanished during high school and I blame much to the overcomplicated way people teach in my country. This explanation is so easy that even a 6 years old kid could understand it. Thank you so much for allowing me to enjoy maths again! ❤❤❤
@benyoutube234
@benyoutube234 Жыл бұрын
I have been trying to find out why a>-1 and you are the only one who mentions it so thanks a lot.
@dangdangheather
@dangdangheather Жыл бұрын
literally the only video with an unknown im so grateful for you thankuuuuu
@TheMathSorcerer
@TheMathSorcerer Жыл бұрын
😀
@dangdangheather
@dangdangheather Жыл бұрын
@@TheMathSorcerer :D
@user-nf6rs2rh4u
@user-nf6rs2rh4u 2 жыл бұрын
Thank you very much for this video. It was really useful to me. 👍🏼
@FadeStrategy
@FadeStrategy 3 жыл бұрын
Thank you so much.
@mantas9827
@mantas9827 4 жыл бұрын
Thanks!!
@forthrightgambitia1032
@forthrightgambitia1032 3 жыл бұрын
Nice. From this you can prove a series of inequalities that lead to the famous Gibbs inequality that is important in machine learning (which is why I was here).
@user-li6ev1ro9c
@user-li6ev1ro9c 4 жыл бұрын
Dude this is great. Love this vido
@TheMathSorcerer
@TheMathSorcerer 4 жыл бұрын
Thanks man!
@xJBRRR
@xJBRRR 7 жыл бұрын
Can you tell me why ka^2 being greater than 0 enables us to drop the term?
@patricksalmas1877
@patricksalmas1877 7 жыл бұрын
So what he's basically doing is showing that, (1 + a)^k * (1 + a)^1 >= 1 + (k + 1)a + ka^2 >= 1 + (k + 1)a He never actually drops the ka^2, what he's really doing is saying that since we know ka^2 will be at least zero, we know that 1 + (k + 1)a will always be less than or equal to itself plus that ka^2. Since the we know that (1 + a)^k * (1 + a)^1 >= 1 + (k + 1)a + ka^2 (base on the induction hyp.). And we know that 1 + (k + 1)a + ka^2 >= 1 + (k + 1)a, we can then conclude that (1 + a)^k * (1 + a)^1 >= 1 + (k + 1)a, and that is what needed to be shown.
@davidfair4852
@davidfair4852 7 жыл бұрын
Awesome, thanks.
@Jazoopi
@Jazoopi 4 жыл бұрын
@@patricksalmas1877 Godbless
@TheDropdeadZed
@TheDropdeadZed 4 жыл бұрын
If the LHS is greater than or equal to the RHS when ka^2 is part of the RHS, then the LHS will STILL be greater than or equal to the RHS when we make the RHS a bit smaller (since ka^2 is either 0, or it's a positive number). E.g. if LHS = 20, RHS = 10. We take away ka^2 = 2, so then RHS becomes 8. 20 is still greater than or equal to 8 so the statement is still true. I guess he didn't really 'take away' ka^2 since he didn't subtract it from both sides, essentially he just removed it from the picture since it didn't affect the inequality.
@jimallysonnevado3973
@jimallysonnevado3973 3 жыл бұрын
as an example 3+5>3 because 5 is positive we didnt really drop the 5 here
@TheMathSorcerer
@TheMathSorcerer 9 жыл бұрын
@ejsimon813
@ejsimon813 9 жыл бұрын
thank you
@shuvammitra8700
@shuvammitra8700 Жыл бұрын
Thank you so much
@chrysanthcrest
@chrysanthcrest 7 жыл бұрын
Thank you!
@TheMathSorcerer
@TheMathSorcerer 7 жыл бұрын
np
@bauyrzhankurmangaliyev347
@bauyrzhankurmangaliyev347 3 жыл бұрын
why it is not a>-1?
@iRealmath
@iRealmath 3 жыл бұрын
Some time ago I saw an article where a>-1 is taken instead of a=>-1. So I guess this guy had a mistake. (sorry for my English)
@dragon-7511
@dragon-7511 2 жыл бұрын
a is greater than -1 .why used ≥ this sign
@somiechannel7407
@somiechannel7407 2 жыл бұрын
❤️❤️❤️
@Medodell
@Medodell 3 жыл бұрын
I see you used the theorem to prove it, I really do not get it
@Copryon
@Copryon 2 ай бұрын
absolute chad
@awesomecraftstudio
@awesomecraftstudio 10 ай бұрын
gotta love this shit
@DarkOutsideNow
@DarkOutsideNow 4 жыл бұрын
Thank you for the video!!... Math: formulas written by people who are lazy, so they short handed everything into hard-to-understand formatting that requires formal education. Sometimes without knowing what level or type of math that's applied, it becomes hard to provide the answer. Suppose x + y = (x+y) is true. prove it. AHH!! Which way?!?! Elementary school style (count those apple, oranges, which are all fruits) or advanced math using proofs that take 10x longer? (Edit for slight grammar issue)
@isaactaremwa001
@isaactaremwa001 4 жыл бұрын
Not so clear but thanks
@oneaboveall6239
@oneaboveall6239 4 жыл бұрын
well i understand Bernoulli's Inequality but i still hate pure math
@energy-tunes
@energy-tunes Жыл бұрын
where numbers
@maxpercer7119
@maxpercer7119 2 жыл бұрын
gets a little murky the logic dealing with the sign of (1+a ) at 3:45 , kind of reverse logic. see math.stackexchange.com/questions/181702/proof-by-induction-of-bernoullis-inequality-1xn-ge-1nx Nice video, i am hooked to math (and your videos).
@SolovisualsMusic
@SolovisualsMusic 7 күн бұрын
Thank you so much
Proof of De Morgan's Law for the Union of Two Sets
1:44
The Math Sorcerer
Рет қаралды 15 М.
Induction: Inequality Proofs
14:30
Eddie Woo
Рет қаралды 275 М.
Как бесплатно замутить iphone 15 pro max
00:59
ЖЕЛЕЗНЫЙ КОРОЛЬ
Рет қаралды 8 МЛН
لقد سرقت حلوى القطن بشكل خفي لأصنع مصاصة🤫😎
00:33
Cool Tool SHORTS Arabic
Рет қаралды 20 МЛН
How To Prove Bernoulli's Inequality
6:58
SyberMath Shorts
Рет қаралды 2,5 М.
Bernoulli's Inequality
12:13
Prime Newtons
Рет қаралды 8 М.
Induction Divisibility
20:35
The Organic Chemistry Tutor
Рет қаралды 476 М.
Induction Inequality Proof: 3^n is greater than or equal to 2n + 1
8:49
The Math Sorcerer
Рет қаралды 56 М.
The SAT Question Everyone Got Wrong
18:25
Veritasium
Рет қаралды 12 МЛН
Binomial Theorem || Proof by Mathematical Induction
15:48
Immaculate
Рет қаралды 20 М.
How To Figure Out Math Proofs On Your Own
9:00
The Math Sorcerer
Рет қаралды 77 М.
All possible pythagorean triples, visualized
16:58
3Blue1Brown
Рет қаралды 3,8 МЛН